|Ullrich and Iverson....Adidas and Reebok.........||chopper|
Jul 31, 2002 8:43 AM
|I just read that Adidas severed all ties with Ullrich because of his amphetamine use and drunk driving. I find it interesting how opposite the relationship between sponsors and team are for Ullrich and Iverson. I keep reading that Reebok sales are through the roof during his little gun-waving spell.|
|re: Ullrich and Iverson....Adidas and Reebok.........||pukka|
Jul 31, 2002 8:48 AM
|i heard that reebok have decided to keep iverson as they have changed marketing stratgies and are no longer targeting sub urban kids but urban youth as suburban kids just copy them anyhow|
|More inner city kids know of Iverson than Ullrich by 1000 fold!!||0_Kewl|
Jul 31, 2002 9:07 AM
|Thus Iverson's endorsement is a cash cow. Some companies are hypocritical the way they handle endorsements, but money talks bullshit walks. Companies can look past controversy, if it generates more revenue and doens't really black eye the company. You tell a kid something he can't do or have these days, they'll do just the about.
Take for example: All the controversy about Grand Theft Auto. The more controversy the media created for it, the more the sales went through the roof. Eminem, cause he is so controversial, his new album is selling like mad crazy.
|Iverson didn't have a gun.||Sintesi|
Jul 31, 2002 9:18 AM
|Juddge dropped the charges when the witnesses couldn't get their stories straight and one admitted to lying.|
Jul 31, 2002 9:57 AM
|Judge dropped charges because the prosection couldnt' prove Iverson had a gun, doesnt make him innnocent of doing it...I predicted day one that the people making the accusations would change their tune when they thought about it..Iverson is their gravy train, if his in the big house, their gravy train runs out of cash...|
Jul 31, 2002 10:13 AM
|the prosection couldnt' prove Iverson had a gun, doesnt make him innnocent of doing it..|
huh? innocent until proven guilty. he may have had a gun but hes innocent until someone proves it.
Aug 1, 2002 4:27 AM
|legally innocent and innocent are apples and oranges|
|Police search turned up no guns either.||Sintesi|
Jul 31, 2002 10:22 AM
|No witnesses, no evidence, no gun.|
|Still a thug||TypeOne|
Jul 31, 2002 11:22 AM
|Maybe no crime was committed, but arguing with your wife and physically removing her from the house in the middle of the night while she is unclothed is pretty poor behavior. Does anyone doubt he later went looking for her? His princely behavior, regardless of his recent acquital, doesn't change what most people have thought about him all along. Yeah, that's keepin' it real.|
|Apples and Oranges...||miposy|
Jul 31, 2002 11:25 AM
|Adidas doesn't care about Ullrich relative to the US, they care about him relative to Europe and other countries where cycling is popular. I imagine that in those places, Ullrich's problems do merit kicking him to the curb.
Here in the US, one shot of extasy and a drunk driving conviction is something most companies are happy isn't worse, will result in just a slap on the hand, and would be overshadowed by something much more serious in a matter of days (a murder, rape, etc.). You just gotta love professional athletes in the US. I'm so proud...
Also, in the US it is, as someone else said, all about the money. Sales figures, not the reputation of a company, is what would determine severence of an endorsement contract. Rarely do companies here, or doing business here, see any kind of relationship between reputation and revenue (See just about any major company).
Maybe Enron and Worldcom should have hired Iverson? I hear Ryan Leaf, and Mike Tyson are looking for endorsement contracts too.